Why I do not believe in God

[EcK]

That's called deceit.

... some people are actually sincere with their faith.

Come on, Eck.

mumbles
tries to bite pers finger off, gives pers the evil eye.
growls



lights a marlboro

 

[Maabus1999]

Hmm some hostility towards religion is so open face it almost reminds me of being evangelical, which is one of the biggest segments I dislike due to its in your face ideology. So we have evangelical-style atheists now? Guess another group for me to dislike for trying to force views on someone.

 

[Didums]

Militant atheists are simply trying to counteract militant theists

 

[Mole]

The problem is that religion and atheism are mutually inhibitory.

Just as the cognitive faculties and the imaginative faculties are mutually inhibitory.

So the struggle between them is part of their very nature.

If one does not metaphorically kill the other, it can't survive.

But one can only remain dominant for a while before it goes stale and so needs to be refreshed by the other.

So happiness is the l'alternance between cognition and imagination and between religiion and atheism.

If you take it seriously, it becomes a tragedy.

But if you hang on tightly and let go lightly, it becomes a comedy.

 

[Moiety]

The problem is that religion and atheism are mutually inhibitory.

Just as the cognitive faculties and the imaginative faculties are mutually inhibitory.

So the struggle between them is part of their very nature.

If one does not metaphorically kill the other, it can't survive.

But one can only remain dominant for a while before it goes stale and so needs to be refreshed by the other.

So happiness is the l'alternance between cognition and imagination and between religiion and atheism.

If you take it too seriously, it becomes a tragedy.

But if you hang on tightly and let go lightly, it becomes a comedy.

And you might just be sent to hell in the process

 

[Jack Flak]

And you might just be sent to hell in the process

 

[Mole]

And you might just be sent to hell in the process

How true.

And on the third day the Saviour will come and redeem me.

And we will dance in the morning, and we will dance in the night.

We will dance the rhythm of l'alternance - my Saviour, the Devil and me.

 

[Oleander]

The Potential Everything from Nothing that physics keeps proving and mystics in Qabbalism, Gnosticism, Hinduism and Buddhism reasoned long ago (and is even in the bible if you know where to look) must be beyond Existence knocks the personified Stalking Zeus fundamentalist 'God' into a cocked hat and out of it again. That's the 'God' that Gnostics called Sama-el, the Blind God, 'Mad, Bad and Dangerous to Know'' of minds taking this world of their experiencce as all there is and deifying their own ignorance as Lord of This World (another name for their 'Satan' and OT 'Jehovah' fantasy). Modern science tells us that what we see is the illusion conditioned by our senses of what is far beyond gross sensory perception - not the mad Jehovah of fundamentalist fantasy who sends a Tsunami to drown thousands who've never heard of him in India and Thailand because Americans refuse to persecute homosexual acts that have gone on without worrying 'Him' since time immemorial.

 

[Lexicon]

I don't believe in God either*, but what about hyperspace/quantum mechanics? Could God not exist and take action there? *skims rest of extremely long post*

*I am an atheist, but I allow for the possibility of the supernatural. It's only logical to do so.

I don't want to repeat people on here... the original post essentially sums up my stance of the possibility of a god.. and Mr. Flak's response was really the only kind of possibility I personally take into consideration with regard to god, and our perceptions of reality, etc. Always open to possibility. *Regardless if he was at any point being sarcastic.. every once in awhile these things go over my head...

I'd like to add, while studying history, early civilizations, etc.. I've never quite understood the rationale [on the level of the individual] behind the jump from the impossibility/rejection of polytheism, to the resulting acceptance of monotheism... I take into consideration that earlier peoples were overall more primitive.. but I still can't understand how that rejection/acceptance "made sense" to them...

..eh.. I probably need to do more reading.

Furthermore.. I wish to point out... as I am atheistic.. the word itself, when broken down, fundamentally and simply means, the absence of belief in one or more dieties. It's not [to me] a practice. It's a simple position on a topic, a preference, same as whether or not I drink Regular or Decaf coffee. There are no rituals. No meetings. No pamphlets. No trying to convert anyone. Personally, I live and let live. Drink my [Regular] coffee. Do I hate Decaf? No. Do I believe in one or multiple gods? No. Do I think religion leads to a lot of social problems across the globe, and for that reason detest it? No. I believe ignorant, irrational extremists do. That's got more to do with poor decision-making on the individual's part based on, perhaps, a skewed perception of their chosen religious background. It's a course of study that people base their personal codes of ethics and moral value systems on. Unfortunately I think these documents are taken out of context often. But I'm not out to save people from evils of the Holy Texts. I don't see any evil there. Live and let live. It's not that hard. Though I realize it's no simple task... I'm a bit too idealistic to be able to offer any real solution to implement, I suppose. Some people need Decaf. I don't. Fine by me. One may think the other is missing out.. but damn folks.. it's all the same beverage to me.

 

[Moiety]

How true.

And on the third day the Saviour will come and redeem me.

And we will dance in the morning, and we will dance in the night.

We will dance the rhythm of l'alternance - my Saviour, the Devil and me.

My point being that for people that are truly religious, happiness isn't about the "l'alternance" you speak of. Supposedly, anyway.

 

[Didums]

I've come to realize as a nonbeliever that I no longer need to amass reasons why I shouldn't believe. All I need to do is demand evidence, and discern whether or not the evidence being presented is viable. The burden of proof is not on the nonbelievers' side, we shouldn't have to prove that something doesn't exist, we should just assume that it doesn't exist until we have reason to believe that it does. Being a defensive-nonbeliever will be a lot less work than being an offensive-nonbeliever.

 

[Jack Flak]

I've come to realize as a nonbeliever that I no longer need to amass reasons why I shouldn't believe. All I need to do is demand evidence, and discern whether or not the evidence being presented is viable.

You don't need that even, and it does no good. Trust me, you'll be happier if you evade the debate.

 

[Didums]

You don't need that even, and it does no good. Trust me, you'll be happier if you evade the debate.

For the sake of knowledge, it is worth it to me if one person's mind could be freed through debate. If one theist was willing to present their evidence to me, and would listen with open-ears to my feedback, and came to understand the logical flaws of their evidence, and had their eyes opened to a whole new reality, that is worth 100% of the effort used on all the failed attempts on other theists. It would give me hope for the future of humanity, an optimism that is hard to come by with justification. Sometimes a pessimist has to hope for something :/

 

[Jack Flak]

For the sake of knowledge, it is worth it to me if one person's mind could be freed through debate. If one theist was willing to present their evidence to me, and would listen with open-ears to my feedback, and came to understand the logical flaws of their evidence, and had their eyes opened to a whole new reality, that is worth 100% of the effort used on all the failed attempts on other theists. It would give me hope for the future of humanity.

The only reason I'll debate someone's dogma today is to silence them, or paint them as foolish to an audience. And be careful with that, because some people have the kind of essence you don't want to mess with, however illogical it may be.

 

[Mycroft]

I've come to realize as a nonbeliever that I no longer need to amass reasons why I shouldn't believe. All I need to do is demand evidence, and discern whether or not the evidence being presented is viable. The burden of proof is not on the nonbelievers' side, we shouldn't have to prove that something doesn't exist, we should just assume that it doesn't exist until we have reason to believe that it does. Being a defensive-nonbeliever will be a lot less work than being an offensive-nonbeliever.

You are absolutely correct.

There is no evidence in favor of a deity. Hence, every theistic argument amounts to one of the following:

- an attack on theories for which there is some evidence
- an attack on ration itself

 

[Mole]

My point being that for people that are truly religious, happiness isn't about the "l'alternance" you speak of. Supposedly, anyway.

And what a good point it is.

As Christians for instance are enjoined to pick up their Cross and follow Christ.

While Muslims are enjoined to jihad and martyrdom.

So you are quite right - for the truly religious, it is not about happiness, particularly a happiness like l'alternance.

In fact l'alternance is the idea of two French psychiatrists in a small book by the same name. Or perhaps the book is called, "The Secret of Happiness".

And it is not religion that seeks happiness but rather your Constitution which enjoins us to the pursuit of happiness.

And perhaps it is not the happiness that matters, but the pursuit.

 

[Darya]

Agree. God (as you've defined it) is a self-contradicting concept.

INFJ who reslies only on logic????? ummm strange...

 

[redacted]

INFJ who reslies only on logic????? ummm strange...

I don't rely only on logic, just heavily.

It seems to be pretty common.

Edit: holy crap that was from like 4 years ago.

 

[RaptorWizard]

God is irrefutably a living being of great power as we can see his manifestations and expressions of his will all throughout the granduer of creation in each and every one of its infinite forms.

 

[Nicodemus]

God is irrefutably a living being of great power as we can see his manifestations and expressions of his will all throughout the granduer of creation in each and every one of its infinite forms.

How does a stone bespeak god's will?